Discussing Romans 9 | Leighton Flowers | Soteriology 101

[@daisyesparza7390]

Studying this text in April is what caused the U petal of TULIP fall off for me. After that, the rest of the petals started falling.

[@Echarterisc]

@daisyesparza7390, Not all petals of the TULIP falls. Total Depravity is biblical, Limited Atonement is biblical and Preservation of the saints is biblical..

[@Jreborn2000]

Except that in keeping with the historical study of the Bible, the early Church did not hold to Total Depravity, Limited Atonement or Perseverance of the Saints.

[@evelynerazohernandez9354]

Awesome! God Bless You. Because of Dr. Flowers I started studying about Calvanist. And someone telling me that God hate’s Esau I said there is no hate in God what he hated was what Esau did.Because if hate is an attribute of God then it would be alright for a Christian to have it?? NO! Hate is bad . Love this live.

[@Echarterisc]

@@evelynerazohernandez9354, ha ha ha! You are seeing with your eyes what the scripture wrote, but you still deny it.. And you call yourself a believer who does not believe the scriptures.. God hates the devil and He also hate the child of the devil. Tell me, did God love Cain and Judas? I still need to see a verse that God loves Judas or Cain.

[@IvanEck-h8u]

Echarterisc, Jesus loved the rich young ruler as he walked away after rejecting God’s Word. Jesus sure acted like he loved Judias. Jesus told us that God loved the world. I don’t know what to tell you if the words and actions of Jesus doesn’t convince you.

[@rickyc-bolt2331]

A 3 hour short, love it!!

[@byronbarker936]

Oh yay! I'm the first to comment 😀, but I haven't watched enough to make one 😊. Still I'm fairly confident that this will be an informative discussion 👍

[@needfortruth534]

🚨Context kills Calvinism 🚨

[@IvanEck-h8u]

needfortruth534, Yes, context coupled with an honest inclusion of the rest of the Bible.

[@bobbyadkins6983]

Knowing God, kills Calvinism.

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Ah, but the Calvinist has an unfalsifiable "Trump Catd". "You haven't been ZAPPED with enlightenment, to thereby understand Scripture you F00L😅 God has decreed for you to THINK you understand it - but you really don't 😅

[@Rocky11WWW]

This was a blessing!

[@granthollandvideos]

I Remener the debate with James White and Leighton. I thought it was very amazing that he ultimately agreed with Leighton but speaking to “ Apostolic authority of Paul “ but Paul does not mention this , . Ita James’s interpretation of what he thinks is Paul’s idea, such a long stretch worth looking into

[@josuediaz198]

I love Pritchett and consider him a KZbin friend! 😎 Hoping to attend trinity seminary soon, Lord willing. 🙏🏽

[@Beloved78]

Johnathan. Talks. A. Lot.

[@SisterBaby]

If. HE. hadn't. Leighton. Would've. 🙂

[@mrupholsteryman]

When I was younger ....I used to think of course the clay can't ask the Potter why did you make me this way.... it's clay. It isn't alive. But I have since matured a little bit. 😊

[@SheilaSmith-z8g]

Humans complicate the simple and simplify the complex. Details always matter, but all details are not necessarily significant.

[@SheilaSmith-z8g]

It's a mistake to reach a conclusion BEFORE reading the entire book and/or the entire essay. The possibility of error is high when a belief is formed from the book or film "reviewers," rather the actual document itself. Read.

[@grayareafaith3534]

Excellent!

[@Dakzstars]

I have a question, when paul says who can resist his will?, what does that actually mean if men actually have free will, seems like peope can actually resist his will

[@evank3217]

Acts 7:51

[@johnknight3529]

In a nutshell, so to speak, I think he was explaining why people are allowed by God to seemingly "get away with" doing things (He tells us in the Book) He does not want us to do. And part of his explanation, as I see it, is that once someone has done something worthy of being "taken out" by Him, so to speak, He feels justified in using them in any way He pleases to advance His plans and intentions, and our understanding of His nature and character. (Pharaoh being one of the examples he uses to illustrate how He did just that.)

[@TheRomans9Guy]

The unbelieving Jew Paul is channeling in verse 19 would have been shocked at Paul’s implication in verse 17 that in light of Paul’s message that the Gentiles were now also children of God, the reason why God chose the Jews first as his people was to raise them up to display his power and so that his name would be proclaimed in all the Earth. Paul was essentially saying it had always been God’s plans to choose the Jews, not because they were special, but for them to SERVE the dirty Gentiles. And God knew how they would act as a result. He knew they would get arrogant and haughty and would even reject the Messiah. So now the objection in verse 19 is coming from a Jew’s perspective asking if God’s treatment of them was all an evil plan.

[@Echarterisc]

@Dakzstars, Definitely man has free will and can always resists God, can reason with God, but God always win..

[@TheRomans9Guy]

@@Echarterisc God always wins, definitely. He gets exactly what he wants. And sometimes he wants for man to be able to freely choose. That is his sovereign will.

[@JustinMay74]

We’re covering this in our Theo3 class and finding out my seminary is Calvinist….

[@SisterBaby]

Not at all unusual! Which seminary are you in?

[@JustinMay74]

@@SisterBaby I’m at Shepherds, it’s a great school and I would have never realized it was Calvinist until I read the Theo 3 textbooks for the soteriology section. We’re reading Hoekema, Demerest, and MacArthur’s Biblical Doctrines. There is so much that I agree with at this school except this point, so I just nod and turn in my papers.

[@SheilaSmith-z8g]

Perfect example of error is the interpretation by calvinists of Rom 3: 10-18. Paul is quoting O.T Palms, not making a claim of condemnation of all humans. The quote is a warning to his audience, not a declaration of Total Depravity. The quotes are about a specific people, at a specific time, on a specific issue: The issue.....Those who reject the existence of God. A little bit of information is a dangerous thing.

[@jeremywolffbrandt7488]

What is the specific people group? The passage says none are righteous not even one, and all have fallen short if the glory of God. Seems universal in context.

[@SheilaSmith-z8g]

@@jeremywolffbrandt7488 Well it isn't. Go to the Old Testiment, Paul is quoting. In your Bible you'll see, after each verse Paul quotes, letters a through f. These are references to Psalms, Proverbs, Isa, that Paul is quoting. All the condemnation are to the Jews that reject the existence of God....therefore to a specific people, at a specific time, on a specific issue. Paul is simply warning his audience, not claiming the condemnation of all mankind. This misunderstanding of Christians on Rom 3: 9-18, is a perfect example of believing what they have been taught, and lacking proper study of scripture. Go read all the foot noted references for yourself.

[@jeremywolffbrandt7488]

@@SheilaSmith-z8g but that's not what Paul says. Just before the OT reference (vs 9) Paul said, "For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin" indicating it isn't just the OT Jews. Right after the reference, he follows up with his own words vs 19, "(...)every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified(...)" He said ALL have sinned and fallen short vs 23. He follows in vs 29 again saying that he isn't talking about just Jews but also gentiles.

[@SheilaSmith-z8g]

@@jeremywolffbrandt7488Was Noah, Abraham, Job, Moses....any person in the bible called "righteous?" Answer: Yes Was any one in the bible, other than Jesus, without sin? Answer: No Think. So... everyone sinned, but a few were called, righteous. Go read Rom 3: 10-18, those referenced versus AGAIN..... and think again. These are NOT indictments of all humans but rather the "they," refers, to those that deny the existance of God. The verses state it! The lack of careful reading has lead to the false conclusion by Calvinist in "Total Depravity." And Total Depravity means no one was, or ever could be, righteous.....a belief not supported in scripture. If you choose to maintain a false, made up John Calvin belief, there is no scripture evidence that will change your mind. Reasoning and evidence matter Jeremy, not propoganda.

[@jeremywolffbrandt7488]

@@SheilaSmith-z8g You said, "they" refers to those that deny the existence of God and that the verses state it. Where? Paul prefaces the OT reference by asking if Jews are better off than Greeks and says no, that all are under the condemnation of sin. He then quotes the OT references that say not even one person is righteous and no one seeks for God. Paul clarifies that all are under condemnation from the law. Regardless of who exactly the OT reference was talking about (Jews or everyone) Paul applies the passage to everyone "Jews and Greek" v9. You accurately point out that there are examples of people who were called righteous. We also see examples of people who were seek God. Rather than argue that Paul didn't mean every person when he said every person, I think a more faithful interpretation is that when Paul said none are righteous and no one seeks God, that is what he meant. In v 25 Paul said that we are justified by the righteousness of God and that he passes over our former sins. I can't read it any other way than that we are fully corrupt and incapable of good like he says in 10-12 but that we are made righteous by His "gift" of grace v24. Calvinists don't say, "no one was, or ever could be, righteous" as you assert. People are made righteous by God'd grace through faith. I agree reasoning and evidence matter. That is why I will stick to the text and not hyperbole.

[@SamHarless-wh1ed]

Calvinism is not Christian. It is a shame that the system has so much power to persuade. It fooled me and ruined my walk. Now I’m out of it but have residual effects that cause doubt towards God. It’s a very dangerous false teaching!

[@SisterBaby]

Yeah. After you've been exposed to it, it's hard to "unsee" it.

[@Mike-qt7jp]

While I absolutely believe God causes/ordains/determines some things. I don’t believe He causes everything to happen. In Jeremiah 19:5 God says, "People built high places to sacrifice their children (in fire) to foreign gods, and He (God) says, "I did NOT COMMAND this, nor did it enter my mind." Also, Joshua 24:15 has Joshua saying, "CHOOSE you this day whom you will serve." What does the Calvinist say sin is? The Biblical definition of sin is missing the mark. Not doing God's will. How can there be sin if God is CAUSING everything to happen? What is sin if EVERYTHING that happens, ONLY happens because GOD CAUSES it to happen? Also, how can there be obedience if EVERTHING ONLY happens because AGAIN God causes all to happen, even "obedience" to God's commands?

[@shredhed572]

There's the disconnect of Calvinism between common, guy level, sense and "mystery" as they call it. I've heard that when some raise the contradiction between man's responsibility and God's decree to their pastor they are told that the reaction they're having is proof of Calvinism, that it is their sinful nature pushing back against the (alleged) truth. So from the jump they are telling them to go against their own sense making and simply trust what doesn't make sense. From this you get Calvinists on the one hand arguing for God's absolute control of everything, and on the other arguing like a non Calvinist for everything else. Sometimes they'll argue both ways at the same time.

[@KISStheSON...]

"Has the word of God failed?" No. Man fails themself by rejecting the wisdom of God that makes a man wise unto salvation from death. Proverbs 8:36 “But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.”

[@brotherderek]

I appreciate the conversation, but in reality, if you've experienced the love of Christ, then you know Calvinism is not true. The scriptures support it as well. Whatever.

[@Echarterisc]

@brotherderek, Not all of Calvinism is not true. For instance predestination for salvation beore one is born is biblical. Limited Atonement is also true and osas is also true. I am not a Calvinist because their doctrine about salvation is not true. And I cannot agree with their belief that regeneration precedes faith..

[@cerealscrub4609]

Predestination before one is born is scriptural? Prove it

[@JesusChristisKing94]

@@Echarteriscprove that

[@Echarterisc]

@@cerealscrub4609, Acts 13:48 NLT "When the Gentiles heard this, they were very glad and thanked the Lord for his message; and all who were chosen for eternal life became believers." Note: Those Gentiles who heard the message for the 1st time were already chosen for eternal life(salvation) even before they hear the message and became believers..

[@Echarterisc]

@@JesusChristisKing94, Prove me wrong if you don't believe...

[@cthulhutoad]

Derrick wouldn't need his stove on if he wore a proper jumper

[@hendrikjansevanrensburg8337]

That makes Paul a Calvinist?

[@robertmcvicar5824]

Two immature original sinners in the womb whom God would have been just to hate. But he chose to love Jacob and leave Esau to his own will.

[@mikealdridge5424]

Why would god be just in hating them? The text literally says that neither had done anything wrong. god calls us to love our enemies. If I can love my enemies and God can’t, what does that say about God. Pretty weak and pathetic if you ask me. God is love my friend.

[@robertmcvicar5824]

@@mikealdridge5424Hi Mike it's true that they hadn't committed any sins yet but they sinned in Adam. A black Mamba is only deadly after it's born but it is a black Mamba. Jacob and Eusa were sinners from their mother's womb. God is Love my friend but his main attribute is Holiness. It's Holy Holy Holy Lord God Almighty. Psalm 7 v11 Psalm 58v3. The cross was alter Love and Justice where God satisfied his wrath against all his peoples sins. The blood Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation. God hates the workers of iniquity. To say That God love only is an unbalanced view of God.

[@mikealdridge5424]

@@robertmcvicar5824 they did not sin in Adam. There is not one verse that makes that claim. Adams sin resulted in death and so death spreads to all mankind not Adam’s guilt. Death is what was defeated. Romans 5 is pretty clear. I’m sorry but you can’t provide one single bit of biblical evidence to support that we sinned in Adam. Holy means set apart. In other words he’s unique. There’s no one like him. And what is it that makes god unique and set apart or holy? It’s his love. The fruits of the spirit are not wrath, anger or hatred. And if you think that God is angry and hateful than that god doesn’t embody the very fruits of the spirit he asks his people to embody. Sounds like every other so called god. Angry and needs to be appeased. Doesn’t sound set apart to me.

[@robertmcvicar5824]

@@mikealdridge5424 Romans5v19 Psalm 7v11-12.

[@robertmcvicar5824]

Romans 5v19 Psalm 7v11

[@Derk-r5y]

WHAT ABOUT THE TERMITES? LOL

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

Parasites?😅

[@delivefreenana]

Does Nick come across as arrogant to anyone?

[@evelynerazohernandez9354]

How dare that guy with the blue hat say that Peter didn’t get anything right.. these men were inspired by God to give the word.🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

[@johnathanpritchett5748]

It was a joke.

[@tonyforeman9502]

Jonathan talks too much.

[@oldtimepreaching]

I believe the strongest argument against your view was made by Martin Luther in his book The Bondage of the Will, written over 500 years ago. It remains one of the most powerful refutations of your position. God has blessed this work, and the fact that it has stood the test of time for centuries, while your view may soon be forgotten, must be difficult to accept. "The name of the righteous is used in blessings, but the name of the wicked will rot" (Proverbs 10:7) I'm not saying you are wicked.

[@cerealscrub4609]

That's exactly what you're saying.

[@johnsteele870]

Mein Kampf is a top seller in Islamic countries so I am led to believe. On that logic the Koran must be God inspired

[@oldtimepreaching]

@@cerealscrub4609 ?

[@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi]

I'll see your little book, and raise you the Holy, Eternal Word of the living God.

[@oldtimepreaching]

​@@UnfrozenCavemanLawyer-xq1qi I agree... The entire Bible speaks of God's sovereignty and His will. He will not share even the smallest part of His glory with anyone, including in matters of salvation. On that point, we are completely aligned. Isaiah 42:8 says, "I am the Lord; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.

[@Echarterisc]

I noticed that it seems you agree with the Calvinist that Election and predestination for salvation nullify the free will of man, This I have to say that Election and predestination never nullify the free will of man. Man has always free will even before or after the fall of Adam.. God chose and predestined the elect to be saved because God knows that the elect will always believe because they are the children of God.. God did not regenerate the elect to believe because the elect will always believe God and the gospel because the elect are born believers...

[@shredhed572]

Calvinism has so pervaded thinking so that whenever words like predetine or elect are discussed everyone (most) automatically thinks with calvinistic definitions, which you have also fallen for. Predestine or election Biblically, is as to roles for believers. For they who have already believed on Jesus. Not in the sense of God deciding who is in and who is out (of the Kingdom). That is the Calvinist definition. Definitions should be clarified before any discussion of this topic. Something Leighton does from time to time, but mostly he uses theirs, speaking "in character" as it were. He shouldn't do this imo. I feel he should simply state the errors of their erroneous definitions, point blank. Next time read the passages containing these words from the standpoint that they are used of those already in the faith, instead of the Calvinist definitions of Unconditional Election, Original Guilt (which is not the same as original sin - again, Calvies SAY "original sin", but mean original guilt. They're very slippery with their rhetoric), PSA, Total Depravity...etc Before you can FULLY untangle the knot that they have made of soteriology I would suggest study up on proper Christology. If you have a proper Christology then the knot of Calvinistic soteriology they've made becomes untangled, almost by itself. Take care

[@Echarterisc]

@@shredhed572, Thank you for your concern, I will study it more..God bless you...

[@IvanEck-h8u]

Echarterisc, Do you think then that God’s elect are not born totally depraved in the Calvinistic sense?

[@Echarterisc]

@@IvanEck-h8u, Yes, only the reprobates are born totally depraved. And the reprobates can never become an elect.. As the goat cannot become a sheep, so reprobates cannot become a sheep. Calvinists believe that all people are born reprobates or totally depraved but God chose some and regenerate them to change their hearts and they become the elect...

[@IvanEck-h8u]

Echarterisc, Another question, my friend. Do you believe then that God created both the elect and the non-elect, or did the non-elect spring from the devil?

[@ErikMiller-co3cr]

Leighton, what is the difference between your theology and open theism? Also, your ridiculous obsession with trying to dismantle a soteriological position that has been preached by giants of the faith throughout history does nothing but sow disunity and confusion in the minds of many young disciples. Also, to anyone unfamiliar with the concepts of ‘Calvinism’ please don’t get your definitions from Leighton… seriously. Asking Leighton to rightly represent reformed soteriology is like asking Hilary Clinton to rightly articulate the positions of the Republican Party. ✌🏼

[@mikealdridge5424]

whenever someone disagrees with Calvinism, that person is then accused of not understanding Calvinism. If his definitions are bad then you should provide better ones

[@clelladams2326]

Welp, then God ordained in eons past for Leighton to do so. Or he ordained you to post a silly comment instead of explaining exactly what is wrong with his understanding of "calvinism" 😂

[@vitaignis5594]

Giants of the faith? I can trace back far greater individuals taught far differently than calvinistic soteriology. If your doctrine isn't really defined until 1500 yrs after the Apostles, you're doing it wrong.

[@johnknight3529]

"Leighton, what is the difference between your theology and open theism?" As far as I can tell, 'open theism' just means not total Predeterminism theism.

[@theresaread72]

There are no giant pillars of the Faith. We are all brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ with the same Bible and Holy Spirit. The Theology that finds God as the author of all evil, that the theology that should be dismantled. God did not create or decree man to sin but sin comes from man who chooses to rebel or repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ